Ok guys, I appreciate your help. I have researched this thing to death so I would no make a duplicate post, but just can get a good explanation on a couple of things.

First thing is sight gap. I read somewhere you want to fill gap completely, and somewhere you need a little gap. I want to be able to shoot bulls at say 20 yards. I can't with factory sights, and I'm pretty good with iron sights so I'm just wondering will better sights help.

Next question. I don't know if I should go night sights or standard? I feel like night sights are a better dual purpose, reason for anything. But are their night sights that can be good target sights, or am I jut asking to much?

Also can you reccomend. I see a lot of suggestions for Dawson, so I was wondering about the blade width I asked about above. Other choice would be TRUGLO TFO'S but are they going to be very accurate? Thanks.

Any Cal.

09-28-2012, 01:16

Light around the front sight makes it easier to pick out, but seems to make it a bit less precise. Trouble is, good sights are nice, but they don't really make the gun shoot any straighter. Mostly just let you shoot it better in lighting and at speeds that poorer sights don't work well at. If the sights aren't zeroed properly, getting them right will help no matter what.

Anyway, the Dawsons are nice. I like the fiber optic front sight personally, and just blacked out the stock rear with a Sharpie. Their Perfect Impact set is neat, they will work with you until you get the right POI.

So u think adjustable is better? I figured I could get a fixed set that would shoot POA

orangeride

09-28-2012, 21:36

If your really serious about making your g a hog/deer gun I'd think very serious about some sort of RMR. My 20 wears adjustable night sights and I'm pretty sure for the reason I have the gun there totally perfect. I personally think RMR's on a personal defense weapon is a waste for 90% of people. Same with lasers. But I think for precise shots where speed is not hyper critical a Rmr might be perfect for your application. I've got a Rmr on a ruger .44mag and its really helped with precise shooting.

johncalloway

09-29-2012, 08:00

Well I don't want it as designated hog gun. Just want to be able to make a good shot if possible.

johncalloway

09-29-2012, 14:29

Question. I see Dawson has tritium sights to. Do they look the same as their regular sights during the day? Don't know if that makes sense?

nickE10mm

09-29-2012, 15:17

My PERSONAL preference is to have the narrowest front sight possible. Also, I MUCH prefer a fiber optic front sight to a night sight.... Honestly, I went through all the same questions as you are now, years back. My FAR preference in a field, hunting, target or range gun is a good, narrow FO front sight and a black adjustable rear (bomar style). On a CCW, night sights are okay... but even still, I probably wont be needing sights when the SHTF cause it would be only 1-5y away).

As was said earlier, the sights won't make you a better shot, but they will make it easier on ya!

Also, YES, an RMR is the ideal setup for hunting (moreso that defense, IMHO) but is VERY expensive when done right. If money was no object, I'd get a melted RMR, yes. No question.

Any Cal.

09-29-2012, 16:09

Alright, here is a pic of the Dawson FO front and a blacked out G20 rear. It is the .105? wide sight, but they all have the same size FO rod, I think. The light on the sides make it easier to find the front sight faster, but with so much space out there it is more difficult to see slight differences in sight alignment. When there is only a tiny sliver of light on each side, it is obvious when you are dead center, but it can be hard to get there when the light isn't right or you are trying to get on poorly lit or dark colored target. -Edit- The picture is taken on an overcast day in semi-shadow, so gives pretty a pretty good idea of how bright the Dawson FO rod is.
http://imageshack.us/a/img805/5464/img0951gk.jpg

I considered buying the tritium, but prefer the glow of fiber optics during the day to just a white dot. If you were shooting in dense blackness against a small target, you may have a slightly better hit probability, but I think that is the only time where tritium would be of any advantage. Against a lit target in the dark, even black sights are silhouetted just fine. I like the idea of the TFOs, but haven't bothered with them due to the lack of different sight heights to properly sight in.

johncalloway

09-29-2012, 20:17

Alright, here is a pic of the Dawson FO front and a blacked out G20 rear. It is the .105? wide sight, but they all have the same size FO rod, I think. The light on the sides make it easier to find the front sight faster, but with so much space out there it is more difficult to see slight differences in sight alignment. When there is only a tiny sliver of light on each side, it is obvious when you are dead center, but it can be hard to get there when the light isn't right or you are trying to get on poorly lit or dark colored target. -Edit- The picture is taken on an overcast day in semi-shadow, so gives pretty a pretty good idea of how bright the Dawson FO rod is.
http://imageshack.us/a/img805/5464/img0951gk.jpg

I considered buying the tritium, but prefer the glow of fiber optics during the day to just a white dot. If you were shooting in dense blackness against a small target, you may have a slightly better hit probability, but I think that is the only time where tritium would be of any advantage. Against a lit target in the dark, even black sights are silhouetted just fine. I like the idea of the TFOs, but haven't bothered with them due to the lack of different sight heights to properly sight in.

Thanks so much. That was a lot of great information to take in. I really like the fiber optic. That's why I considered the TFO'S. I just want the best sight picture I can get. TFO'S are great I know as a defense sight, but I like to target shoot to and don't know if they are crisp enough.

ProCarryNAustin

09-30-2012, 02:36

I have used Dawson FO sights on almost all of my pistols. The green FO is nice, but for me the red really pops! For me, if it was dark enough to need nightsights, it was too dark to really see the target. The FO sites work just fine even at dusk.

nickE10mm

09-30-2012, 11:12

I have used Dawson FO sights on almost all of my pistols. The green FO is nice, but for me the red really pops! For me, if it was dark enough to need nightsights, it was too dark to really see the target. The FO sites work just fine even at dusk.

+100 yep

M1A Shooter

09-30-2012, 13:09

for day and night shooting, i prefer the amerigle hackathorn sights. at night, its a standard night sight, daytime has an orange ring around the tritium insert that really pops in the light. at dusk and dawn conditions they are like normal iron sights though. hard to see either option in somewhat low light. these are what i have on all of my glocks with the exception of my 26 but only because i havent picked up another set yet.

johncalloway

09-30-2012, 13:57

these look pretty cool. do yall see any disadvantages to these over Dawson's
http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u172/Callo21/GL433_0.jpg

M1A Shooter

09-30-2012, 16:53

the newest versions coming out are milled just slightly different to allow you to recharge the gun on a strong belt one handed for what thats worth. i have had them on my 17, 23, and 35. i havent tried to hunt with them out in the woods but they are pretty quick on target for me in IDPA. i prefer the plain rear as 3 dots can be distracting imho when trying too hard to line them up right instead of just see orange dot, press trigger.

i had debated the TFO idea as well as i think its about right, at least in theory. but i have also heard several complaints about the fibers getting messed up with common solvents. lots of people seem to love them but that was my thoughts going with these sights. i was originally thinking of a wide 10-8 style rear sight with a tfo front but decided i would give the hackathorns a try and am glad i did

alank2

09-30-2012, 18:26

Hi,

I recommend Ameriglo classic night sights. You can get the front with a slimmer width in a variety of heights. The height flexibility would allow you to do a custom sight setup that you could be within +/- 3" vertically within 100 yards, etc.

Good Luck,

Alan

SDGlock23

09-30-2012, 19:56

My new favorite is the Ameriglo I-Dot sights. It has great sight picture, the front sight is just right for me, not so wide that everything is congested (like Glock brand sights), but not so thin that you have to work to get it centered up. Great sight picture and gives a nice two-dot night sight setup for low-light situations. Even better is that they're $60 at CTD.

johncalloway

10-02-2012, 06:48

So are y'all recommending slimmer or a fatter front sight for precise shots?

nickE10mm

10-02-2012, 07:03

So are y'all recommending slimmer or a fatter front sight for precise shots?

Slimmer, no question.

ProCarryNAustin

10-02-2012, 20:50

So are y'all recommending slimmer or a fatter front sight for precise shots?

For me, slimmer works better for precise shots.

Any Cal.

10-03-2012, 02:58

You just need something to reference. A wide sight with a small dot can work, or even a plain black wide sight can work with the right target. It is hard shooting a shotgun hull at a distance with a fat sight, but it can be hard to see a super fine sight at all in some conditions(think steel Colt single action sights). Everything will be a compromise to some extent somewhere. Realistically, practice with whatever you have is probably more important than whatever you end up with.

johncalloway

10-03-2012, 03:36

I have racked my brain through hundreds of sights trying to figure out what I need. I want something I can take bullseye accurate shots at 25 yards, and something I can see in no light if a big hog gets after me walking out of the stand. I will have a flashlight, but probably won't be able to see my sights unless they are tritium night sights. But don't feel like tritium sights are precise enough.

piperman

10-03-2012, 07:30

Based on everything that you are looking for, you sound like how I was. I would say, .100 front sight, TFO type, so that you have the tritium and the FO. Plain black rear sight. That will probably be the best compromise.

Steve

johncalloway

10-03-2012, 08:20

Based on everything that you are looking for, you sound like how I was. I would say, .100 front sight, TFO type, so that you have the tritium and the FO. Plain black rear sight. That will probably be the best compromise.

Steve

How am I going to know what will match up?

piperman

10-03-2012, 09:05

I went to the web sites, and first off, I don't see that you can get the front TFO sight by itself, which I find odd. What I would say to do is you could call Lone Wolf and ask them to let you know what black rear sight would match up with the TFO sights, you may have to buy the set of TFOs. I don't remember where I got mine at, I have a green TFO front sight and a black serrated rear sight. These work great for shooting USPSA and IDPA as well as anything else I want to do. I will say that if you are looking for quick acquisition in the dark, the rear won't let that happen. It is very hard to see the rear sight quickly in the dark, as you may well imagine.

Also, the front sight with the TFO set, may line up with the factory rear sight, I was looking at mine, seems to be a very close match.

dm1906

10-03-2012, 15:37

I have racked my brain through hundreds of sights trying to figure out what I need. I want something I can take bullseye accurate shots at 25 yards, and something I can see in no light if a big hog gets after me walking out of the stand. I will have a flashlight, but probably won't be able to see my sights unless they are tritium night sights. But don't feel like tritium sights are precise enough.

If you stumble upon a hog (or vice versa) in the dark, it WILL be: Draw; Point; Shoot. There will be no "aim". You won't see your sights. You won't hear the shot. If your rounds are filled with Blue Dot, you WILL get a snapshot of about a 25 yd diameter. Think muzzle flash is bad? You are mistaken. A large muzzle flash will be your only chance at a follow up shot if you are being run down. The flash will allow you to see where your bullet travels, and where the target is. Your flashlight will have already screwed your night vision more than the flash will. You'll be amazed what practice coupled with adrenaline will do for you. The adrenaline will dilate your pupils and elevate your senses. If you aren't scared, with the adrenaline pumping, then you're poaching, in most states (after dark).

Practice Point-Shoot, often. Live it. Learn it. It's the only method that will save your bacon in the dark (except for dumb-luck). Your sights won't matter, one bit. Not the slightest bit. Night sights are ONLY effective against a lighted target, if you have time to aim. A flashlight is only effective until you draw, or begin to draw. At night, it ain't gonna happen in the sticks.

That said, I like the TFO's, and use them.

Any Cal.

10-03-2012, 22:19

I was thinking along the lines of dm. The odds of getting an aimed shot on a small dark object racing toward you in the dark are slim. Just put the sights you want on it for the daytime and know a shot in the dark is, well, a shot in the dark...:-)

SDGlock23

10-04-2012, 09:19

So are y'all recommending slimmer or a fatter front sight for precise shots?

Slimmer for sure. Too slim can present and issue to IMHO. I had a fiber optic setup where my rear sight notch was .180" wide and my front fiber optic post was .115" wide...that's too thin IMHO as it was really too roomy. If I had a good way of taking a picture of my I-dots I would. The front sight is slim enough to be precise too.